Alternatively, some stress the political determinants of imperialism, contending that states are motivated to expand primarily by the desire for power, security, and diplomatic advantages. The New Imperialism was a desire to maintain or recover national prestige. In this view, French imperialism was intended to restore France’s national prestige after the loss of Alsace-Lorraine in the Franco-Prussian war in 1870-1871, and to replace the provinces with overseas gain. Upon Germany’s entry into the colonial arena in 1884, Chancellor Caprivi commented that many Germans believed that ‘once we came into possession of colonies… we would become a great people’. Therefore it was generally felt that national pride depended on the success of their government’s exploits overseas.
There is a third view for the factors of European imperialism. According to this perspective, European peoples believed they were the most advanced and civilized in the world, and had a duty to civilize natives of colonized lands. Britain's colonial empire was motivated at least in part by the idea that it was the “white man's burden” to civilize “backward” peoples. Charles Darwin’s scientific researches into the evolution of life were popularised, and ultimately distorted, to demonstrate that the laws of evolution applied to races and to nations, as well as plants and animals. This was never Darwin’s intention, for he had never made any reference to the races of mankind in his research. However, some Europeans, namely missionaries, felt they had a ‘calling’ to help the less fortunate of the races (in their view, these were the yellow, brown and black races), and to teach them Christian values.
As European states modernised, there was a general increase in literacy. With this came the rise of a popular press, and a demand for adventure and travel stories. This was fuelled by the exciting accounts of national explorers of faraway nations in Africa. Colonial exploits therefore became popular amongst the general public, and became a means of intensifying nationalism. Such support exerted a considerable influence on government.
However, it must be taken into account that colonialism on such a large scale would not have been possible had it not been for Industrialization which had brought with it advances in technology that broadened the horizons of European nations. The development of steam-powered transportation, by British inventors Thomas Newcomen, James Watt and George Stephenson, long journeys were made possible and relatively inexpensive. The invention of the electric telegraph, and numerous medical breakthroughs allowed explorers to survive in the harsh conditions in Africa. It therefore opened up the possibility of global trade and European expansion, and should rightly be factored as a factor of European imperialism.
Philosophers such as Karl Marx stressed that the only real motive in the New Imperialism was driven by capitalist greed for raw materials, and markets for investment opportunities. The Marxists dismiss other reasons, be they humanitarian, prestige, national security, religious or political as mere excuses for the real motive which was economic exploitation of Africa.
In conclusion, there were indeed many factors that attracted European imperialism to Africa. However, I tend to agree with the Marxist view that the New Imperialism was driven largely by the economic promise of wealth attainable by the exploitation of colonial markets, and that other reasons were but incidental to colonization. Had there been no such economic incentive, I believe that the New Imperialism would not have occurred, that Africa would have been left to its own devices, and that daring explorers such as Livingstone would have been the sole link between Europe and Africa.